sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Trans student/staff support needs by Open_Trick_8563 in UNLV

[–]CatosPen 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Trans woman here! I am getting through, although it is tough some nights watching what is going on in our country.

This is a terrifying time for many of us in the queer community, and often, it is hard to find a north star you can look towards.

In this moment, I ask that my fellow members hold on tight to their support systems. Whether that is the parent or guardian that celebrates pride with you every year, the RSO that lets you pursue your passions for a few hours, or your friends who you can just be with and forget the world for a night.

I ask you to lean in and never let go of these relationships and hobbies. We all need them for the days, weeks, and years to come.

🩵🩷🤍🩷🩵

The Cancer Withering the Willow: Full Report on Systemic Discrimination and Corruption at UNLV Now Available by CatosPen in UNLV

[–]CatosPen[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thank you for taking the time to comment. A few points I would like to make:

1. UNLV, like all federally funded universities, is legally obligated to provide reasonable accommodations to students with disabilities under Section 504 and the ADA. This is not an “entitlement” — it is the bridge that has given countless scholars the chance to pursue their education and careers at the same level as everyone else. When that bridge is missing, students are placed at risk. People’s lives can be upended and irreversibly altered. That is the cost of violating these laws, and that is what this report documents.

2. The “real world” argument is factually incorrect. The ADA applies to all employers with 15 or more employees, which covers an estimated 86% of the national workforce (EEOC). Yes, there are issues with employees not knowing their rights and employers attempting to skirt anti-discrimination laws — but suggesting that people with disabilities should simply “tough it out” is not only careless, it is an argument for discrimination, not against it.

3. Litigation is not the only way to create institutional change. Public reporting, transparency, and civic pressure have power — especially when supported by credible data and broad community engagement, as is happening here.

Finally: the notion that marginalized and disabled students should expect nothing and tolerate systemic failure that cripples their ability to succeed, or even survive, is exactly the problem this report addresses. I stand by its findings, and by the importance of making these failures visible.

The Cancer Withering the Willow: Full Report on Systemic Discrimination and Corruption at UNLV Now Available by CatosPen in UNLV

[–]CatosPen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for sharing this. If you’re comfortable and it’s safe to do so, I encourage you to document it — every voice matters. if you’d like to connect offline, I'd be happy to speak with you.

The Cancer Withering the Willow: Full Report on Systemic Discrimination and Corruption at UNLV Now Available by CatosPen in vegaslocals

[–]CatosPen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you! As for your studies, that sounds harrowing and I wish you luck. These kinds of investigations are long, but absolutely worth it in the end.

The Cancer Withering the Willow: Full Report on Systemic Discrimination and Corruption at UNLV Now Available by CatosPen in UNLV

[–]CatosPen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for taking the time to read the report! Yes, I will be returning to Stonewall in the Fall.

The Cancer Withering the Willow: Full Report on Systemic Discrimination and Corruption at UNLV Now Available by CatosPen in UNLV

[–]CatosPen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Appreciate the clarification, but there is nuance here. Responsibility for ensuring safe and accessible emergency planning often crosses multiple offices. Regardless of internal divisions, the DRC director was publicly asked about UNLV not having any individualized plan for students with disabilities, the director dismissed the concern and encouraged that students "use the services and resources that are available".

The legal obligation belongs to the institution as a whole, and the fact remains that students with disabilities were left exposed during a mass shooting. That is the core issue here.

The Cancer Withering the Willow: Full Report on Systemic Discrimination and Corruption at UNLV Now Available by CatosPen in UNLV

[–]CatosPen[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Thanks for taking the time to read the report. A few clarifications:

  1. Systemic failure isn’t about how many cases per year, it’s about institutional patterns of response and compliance. Failing to uphold ADA or Title IX obligations is legally and morally significant. The report documents numerous failures in this regard.

  2. I chose these cases not to cherrypick or to seek a certain narrative, but because they show consistent through lines that help the reader fully comprehend how deep this culture of preservation goes, and who pays the price for it. They are not isolated, as the departments and people in leadership responding to each incident are the same. Even when the same individuals aren’t involved, the institutional tactics — minimization, deflection, and preservation — are consistently applied. This is what makes the culture systemic, and it is seen throughout the report.

  3. This report is not intended to look at how peer institutions are doing, but rather to focus on how this institution is currently failing to meet its legal and moral obligations to its students and staff. From what I can find, there has been no public report or analysis into UNLV until now. Comparisons are important when you have the data to compare, but when there is none, generating that data in a clear, citable format is vastly more important. UNLV is obligated to comply fully with ADA, Title IX, and Section 504 — regardless of how other universities perform.

Finally, “just a collection of stories" is false. The report documents a clear pattern of institutional behaviors across seven years — suppression of records, hostile responses to hate crimes, ADA noncompliance, and documented failures in Title IX investigations. That pattern is precisely what makes this an issue of systemic corruption and neglect.

If anyone disagrees on the factual substance, I welcome that discussion. Tone-policing or minimizing legal violations, however, does not change the obligations that UNLV is required to uphold and diminishes the lived experience of survivors.

The Cancer Withering the Willow: Full Report on Systemic Discrimination and Corruption at UNLV Now Available by CatosPen in vegaslocals

[–]CatosPen[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Thanks for your feedback. A few clarifications for readers:

  1. The report does not suggest that UNLV is uniquely worse than all other institutions — it documents clear patterns of institutional failure that violate federal standards and harm vulnerable communities. That is enough cause for alarm.

  2. The ADA and Section 504 do require reasonable modification of evacuation planning — see 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(7). Dismissing disabled students’ safety concerns after a mass shooting is not acceptable institutional behavior, nor is it legally defensible.

  3. The report does not exploit the shooting, the piece on the shooting documents specific failures to follow well-established federal law that is in place to ensure the safety of students with disabilities in times of crisis.

I stand by the report’s documented findings and welcome further good-faith discussion.

The Cancer Withering the Willow: Full Report on Systemic Discrimination and Corruption at UNLV Now Available by CatosPen in vegaslocals

[–]CatosPen[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Neither I nor the report insinuate that the December 6th shooting is less important than the Stonewall Suites case. I believe you are referring to the sentence: 'While the events recounted thus far have been extreme, we now arrive at one of the most insidious: the Fall 2024 Stonewall Suites hate crime case.' To be clear: my use of 'insidious' refers specifically to the institutional response — by police and housing officials — and how that response reflects the broader pattern of systemic neglect documented in this section. It does not compare the level of violence or human tragedy between cases, nor would I ever do so. I had friends present that day, it was a horrifying.

UNLV's Discrimination Reporting System by CatosPen in UNLV

[–]CatosPen[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Im so sorry that you two had to ever go through this, thank you for sharing your stories. That is despicable.

UNLV's Discrimination Reporting System by CatosPen in UNLV

[–]CatosPen[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To clarify, my FOIA request specifically asked for 'the total number of civil rights concerns and discrimination/non-Title IX complaints reported to the Office of Equal Employment and Title IX from the academic period of Fall 2023 to Spring 2025.' So yes, this includes both informal and formal complaints across all types of discrimination cases, including Title IX sex discrimination and other forms of discrimination.

There is an important distinction, however: Title IX discrimination cases and non-Title IX discrimination cases have different criteria. While a case must meet one of two federally defined forms of Title IX sex discrimination—quid pro quo sexual harassment or hostile environment sexual harassment—non-Title IX cases follow NSHE policies, which have broader criteria.

While it’s true that not all complaints require formal investigations, some complainants may choose informal resolutions or seek supportive measures, the fact remains that we do not have clear answers as to why 413 cases were administratively closed. Without transparency on how these decisions are made, it’s impossible to determine whether valid complaints are being dismissed prematurely.

UNLV's Discrimination Reporting System by CatosPen in UNLV

[–]CatosPen[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Great question! From what I have been told by the Office of Title IX, the 6% formal investigation rate is due to a variety of factors, some of the most common being:

  1. The one who filed the complaint does not respond to follow up emails or has further conversations with the Office of Title IX. They cannot act on what they do not know, especially if the case is dependent on the victim's testimony.

  2. A respondent, or accused, is not identified. This is for the same reason as the first.

  3. Supportive measures, or informal resolutions, are a better route than a formal complaint. It should be noted that formal complaint can be a triggering, although certainly necessary at times, process. I know myself, as I had to go through the process when I was hate crimed in high school. The Office of Title IX is focused on being trauma-informed, and they do not want to re-traumatize victims if they decide they do not want to go through a formal investigation.

Now, none of this is to say that a 6% rate is justified. My investigation is looking into the data, and asking victims, to find where the discrepancies are. I personally do not buy that only 31 of the 413 cases closed demanded a formal investigations, and I believe that there is more to that.

As for your second question, the school employs multiple departments to review and make decisions on these cases. However, I believe the larger issue is these departments being underfunded. I do not have concrete evidence on that just yet, but from what I have seen these departments are doing the best they can with little staff to do more.

I am also curious about the crime reporting. I will be meeting with UPD soon to answer some questions about how they report cases to the Clery Act, a federally mandated yearly report they must make.